<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>LawFont.com &#187; Antitrust</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.lawfont.com/category/law/antitrust/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.lawfont.com</link>
	<description>an analysis of law, technology, economics, and policy</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 00:35:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>More on that iPhone paper</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/02/29/more-on-that-iphone-paper/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/02/29/more-on-that-iphone-paper/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Feb 2008 00:01:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kim</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Antitrust]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Telco]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/2008/02/29/more-on-that-iphone-paper/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This morning, one of the authors of the iPhone paper I mentioned earlier this week defends his views against Gans&#8217; comments.  One thing about Dale&#8217;s defence struck me as interesting, and that was this:
Professor Gans correctly makes the point that Apple could try and obtain permission (technically, an exclusive dealing notification) from the ACCC. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/02/29/more-on-that-iphone-paper/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>C7 judgment handed down this afternoon&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/07/27/c7-judgment-handed-down-this-afternoon/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/07/27/c7-judgment-handed-down-this-afternoon/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2007 06:58:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>susanne</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Antitrust]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Broadcasting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judgments]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/2007/07/27/c7-judgment-handed-down-this-afternoon/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The much anticipated judgment in the C7 matter has been handed down today&#8230;it&#8217;s a wopping 1230 pages/7MB. Get it here. In a very small nutshell, Channel 7 did not prove its pleaded case and was thus unsuccessful. The issue of costs is still to be worked out. His Honour Justice Sackville estimates costs in excess [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/07/27/c7-judgment-handed-down-this-afternoon/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>ACCC sues Google over sponsored links</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/07/13/accc-sues-google-over-sponsored-links/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/07/13/accc-sues-google-over-sponsored-links/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Jul 2007 07:58:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sarah</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Antitrust]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/2007/07/13/accc-sues-google-over-sponsored-links/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Australia&#8217;s competition regulator, the ACCC, is taking Google to court, alleging that the search engine company has engaged in &#8220;misleading and deceptive conduct in relation to sponsored links that appeared on the Google website&#8221;, in contravention of section 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth). 
Section 52(1) provides that a &#8220;corporation shall not, in [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/07/13/accc-sues-google-over-sponsored-links/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>SonyBMG merger voided by European court</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2006/07/14/sonybmg-merger-voided-by-european-court/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2006/07/14/sonybmg-merger-voided-by-european-court/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Jul 2006 22:02:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sarah</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Antitrust]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EU]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/?p=344</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[For the first time, the Court of First Instance has annuled the European Commission&#8217;s approval of a company merger. In January 2004, Sony and BMG notified the Commission that they intended to merge their worldwide music recording businesses (except for Japan) into a joint venture. In July 2004 the Commission approved the joint venture in [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2006/07/14/sonybmg-merger-voided-by-european-court/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Microsoft struggles to innovate, while preserving compatibility</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2006/03/27/microsoft-struggles-to-innovate-while-preserving-compatibility/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2006/03/27/microsoft-struggles-to-innovate-while-preserving-compatibility/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Mar 2006 06:13:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sarah</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Antitrust]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/?p=257</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There is a very interesting article in The New York Times about Microsoft&#8217;s current difficulties in releasing Vista&#8211;the successor to operating system Windows XP. It&#8217;s been five years since Windows XP was released. In the same time, Apple has been much more nimble in the operating system market, releasing four new versions of its operating [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2006/03/27/microsoft-struggles-to-innovate-while-preserving-compatibility/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Supreme Court holds that patents do not necessarily confer market power</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2006/03/04/supreme-court-holds-that-patents-do-not-necessarily-confer-market-power/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2006/03/04/supreme-court-holds-that-patents-do-not-necessarily-confer-market-power/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Mar 2006 04:42:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sarah</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Antitrust]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/?p=243</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a significant shift from its jurisprudence of the past forty years, the United States Supreme Court has rejected the presumption that a patent confers market power on the holder of that patent. In Illinois Tool Works Inc. v Independent Ink, Inc. (No. 04-1329, decided 1 March 2006), the Supreme Court concluded that since a [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2006/03/04/supreme-court-holds-that-patents-do-not-necessarily-confer-market-power/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What is region coding? (Part 2)</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2005/12/31/what-is-region-coding-part-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2005/12/31/what-is-region-coding-part-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 31 Dec 2005 08:59:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sarah</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Antitrust]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DRM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[What is...?]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/?p=166</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Earlier this month I posted Part 1 of â€œWhat is region coding?â€, which described the technology, commercial rationale, and economic effects of this system. This posting is Part 2, and considers the legal implications of region coding, with a focus on developments in the United States and Australia. 
CSS litigation
Before considering the legal implications of [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2005/12/31/what-is-region-coding-part-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Spitzer subpoenas four record companies about pricing of downloadable music</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2005/12/26/spitzer-subpoenas-four-record-companies-about-pricing-of-downloadable-music/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2005/12/26/spitzer-subpoenas-four-record-companies-about-pricing-of-downloadable-music/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Dec 2005 22:54:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ben</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Antitrust]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[eBusiness]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/?p=163</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The New York Times is reporting that Elliott Spizer&#8217;s office has served subpoenas on Universal Music, Sony, EMI and Warner Music as part of an investigation into whether the &#8220;four record companies that dominate the industry have violated antitrust laws in the pricing of songs that are sold by Internet music services&#8221;.
The article doesn&#8217;t elaborate [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2005/12/26/spitzer-subpoenas-four-record-companies-about-pricing-of-downloadable-music/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What is region coding? (Part 1)</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2005/12/22/what-is-region-coding/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2005/12/22/what-is-region-coding/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Dec 2005 22:21:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sarah</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Antitrust]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DRM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[What is...?]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/?p=160</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This edition of â€œWhat isâ€¦?â€ describes the regional coding systems used by the entertainment industry, with a particular emphasis on DVDs. This article will explain the technology behind region coding, describe how the system is enforced, and speculate on the commercial reasons for the system. It will then consider the economic effects of region coding [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2005/12/22/what-is-region-coding/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Media convergence: television/film and the Internet</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2005/11/21/media-convergence-televisionfilm-and-the-internet/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2005/11/21/media-convergence-televisionfilm-and-the-internet/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2005 05:03:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sarah</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Antitrust]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[p2p]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/?p=133</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It&#8217;s been a long time coming.  The television and Internet industries are working together to offer consumers the ability to download, legally, movies and television episodes. This convergence might be seen as inevitable, particularly  since the advent of TiVo, Foxtel iQ, and other services using digital video recording systems (DVRs), as well as [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2005/11/21/media-convergence-televisionfilm-and-the-internet/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
